Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
 Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:35 |
 
|
| Grod wrote: | | Maybe they are just holding a low profile until they surprise us all with a completely revamped blood bowl product line? |
30th anniversery edition! 
let's start that rumour again... |
|
|
bigGuy
Joined: Sep 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:43 |
|
Um, as fart as I know, game rules are not "copyrightable". But rulebook images/composition is. So, if we copy plain text, and draw our own images to explain passing/blocking, it shouldnt infringe copyrights. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:47 |
|
^^ he said fart. |
_________________
 |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:50 |
|
'Fart' (not the rest of it) might be the most sensible thing written in this, or any other, BB forum of late. It's been pretty incessant. 
Things tend to quiet down over a weekend. With any luck we'll be in a saner place come Monday. |
Last edited by Purplegoo on %b %11, %2014 - %08:%Apr; edited 1 time in total |
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:57 |
|
| bigGuy wrote: | | Um, as fart as I know, game rules are not "copyrightable". But rulebook images/composition is. So, if we copy plain text, and draw our own images to explain passing/blocking, it shouldnt infringe copyrights. |
why don't we do that? and add it to the wiki?
there are very few pictures in crp... |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:21 |
|
| Roland wrote: | | bigGuy wrote: | | Um, as fart as I know, game rules are not "copyrightable". But rulebook images/composition is. So, if we copy plain text, and draw our own images to explain passing/blocking, it shouldnt infringe copyrights. |
why don't we do that? and add it to the wiki?
there are very few pictures in crp... |
Before anyone does anything like that I think we should wait for christer saying it's ok. I believe copy and pasting large chunks of text also breaks ip law. I'm sure I read on their site a while back that small quotes are fine but large chunks of text are not. |
_________________
 |
|
bigGuy
Joined: Sep 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:53 |
|
And consult a lawyer, of course. |
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:10 |
|
then just we just have to rewrite the rules
there are no copyrights for words, are there? |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:19 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | I suspect it means nothing more than a reorganisation of a website. |
You're usually somewhat informed... what happened? 
GW says that Specialists Games will not be supported. GW removes the Specialist Games department. GW says the molds for the Specialist Games are to be destroyed and no new molds will be made. GW removes Specialist Games from their new (and annoying) website.
I never took you for being willfully ignorant before. This is probably the saddest thing GW has ever done... they broke Pgoo |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:21 |
|
| bigGuy wrote: | | And consult a lawyer, of course. |
*puff* WHO DARES SUMMON ME?! 
The text (wording) is protected by IP law. Same goes for trademark names like Blood Bowl itself and probably a whole bunch of other stuff like the famous teams, star players et al. It would still not be too hard to produce a legit BB retro-clone that allows to play the game without challenging IP, I suppose. But it would be tons of work and no two people would be able to agree on how to do it right. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:24 |
|
We knew that already, didn't we Fouly? Old news long discussed elsewhere.
News that would precipitate... The reorganisation of a website? |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:28 |
|
Poor, poor, broken Pgoo |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:29 |
|
As far as I know, game mechanics and rulebooks are copyrightable. I was told by lawyer. If you are expert and have evidence to the contrary, then please let me know, as I have great interest learning more about it. |
_________________
 |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:35 |
|
I truly hope that no one else ever gets their hands on the Blood Bowl rights. Or at least if they do, they'll be a firm and uncaring overlord, just like their predecessors at Games Workshop.
I'd hate to see Blood Bowl degenerate to 50 different versions of the game where you'd have to ask whos version they're playing down at the local club.
"Oh we're playing the Walters 5th ed with a bit of the Cyanide 3rd edition thrown in... we call it Legend Bowl edition" |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:48 |
|
I am not an IP law expert, let alone an expert on UK IP law. But I can tell you the general idea. The general idea is that copyright only applies to an actual work, such as a text. It does not apply to an idea or concept, such as a 2 dice block. It gets trickier with trademarks. Which is why all the (A)D&D retro-clones do not have Beholders. So you probably couldn't call your speedy rat men "Skaven" and your bouncy frog men "Slann". Etc. pp. |
|
|
|
|
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
